Tweet
Subject: Dynamic approximations
Dear colleagues:
I have followed, with great interest, the recent discussions of kinematic
descriptors. To expand on this - a great deal of our literature deals with
kinetic aspects utilizing estimates for I, m, and CM locations for the
involved segments (not to mention 3D). My question deals with how we can
reconcile the dynamic equations (which use these approximations) so they
are useful in a practical and/or diagnostic sense - that is, how much
"trust" can we place on the resulting values. Intra-individual comparisons
would seem most useful as any bias introduced by the approximations would
remain consistent across trials; inter-individual comparisons would appear
to introduce additional unknown biases across subjects. How can (should)
one reconcile these difficulties (in addition to kinematic difficulties!)
so that real-world decisions can be made?
Regards,
P.E. "Pat" Patterson
Dear colleagues:
I have followed, with great interest, the recent discussions of kinematic
descriptors. To expand on this - a great deal of our literature deals with
kinetic aspects utilizing estimates for I, m, and CM locations for the
involved segments (not to mention 3D). My question deals with how we can
reconcile the dynamic equations (which use these approximations) so they
are useful in a practical and/or diagnostic sense - that is, how much
"trust" can we place on the resulting values. Intra-individual comparisons
would seem most useful as any bias introduced by the approximations would
remain consistent across trials; inter-individual comparisons would appear
to introduce additional unknown biases across subjects. How can (should)
one reconcile these difficulties (in addition to kinematic difficulties!)
so that real-world decisions can be made?
Regards,
P.E. "Pat" Patterson